Public Education Under New Management: A Typology of Educational Privatization Applied to New York City's Restructuring

Abstract

Educational privatization is rapidly expanding in many urban school districts, altering the social, political, and economic dynamics of educational policy and leadership. Yet many adherents cast privatization primarily as a fiscal or economic alternative to traditional public school management, ignoring these broader alterations. Drawing from a review of the educational privatization literature, as well as an analysis of current privatization reforms, this article offers an original typology of educational privatization and applies the typology to the reforms underway in New York City. It concludes with a discussion of the implications of this typology and privatization reforms for educational leadership practice and policy.

We thank the editors and two anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments.

Notes

¹ We define systemic privatization as the comprehensive, private sector-reliant activities in school districts that involve not only multiple district operations but also those within local schools (Feigenbaum & Henig, 1994).

² The DOE also banned cell phones in all city schools over significant parental opposition.

³ This award is given to the most improved urban school system that is funded by venture philanthropist Eli Broad. He favors corporate-style management and competition to improve urban schools.

⁴ New York City has had a complicated school governance history, with community boards being the only elected bodies. These were abolished under mayoral control. For a discussion of the evolution of school governance, see Hemphill (2009).